About a month after candidates sat for the written and oral exams, the results remain pending. Meanwhile, a move has emerged to subject successful candidates to a practical clinical exam—specifically an OSCE—which, according to the doctors, was not included in the announced program for the first session of 2026. While a meeting of the Higher Education Council concluded last week without discussing the issue—and without any official statement from the Ministry of Education and Higher Education—the 224 candidates are preparing to file a formal challenge with the State Council.
 

This raises the question: Is the administration permitted to alter the terms of an official examination after it has already commenced and candidates have completed its previously announced stages? In this context, the objecting physicians insist that they do not oppose modernizing the licensing examinations or enhancing the clinical assessment component; rather, they distinguish between the principle of adopting the exam and its application to a session that began under specific, announced conditions. For them, introducing a new examination stage after the written and oral exams have already taken place effectively means changing the rules of the process after it has begun. They state that they made professional and academic decisions based on the announced program; some have left Lebanon, while others have enrolled in specialization programs or applied to universities and hospitals abroad, awaiting confirmation of their success.

This point is particularly significant because the colloquium certification is not merely an examination result; it is an essential document for practicing the profession, finalizing equivalency procedures, and registering for certain specialization programs—both within Lebanon and abroad. Consequently, the impact of the delay extends beyond the mere waiting period; it can result in the loss of training opportunities, the postponement of registration deadlines, and complications regarding residency and travel arrangements, as well as professional obligations subject to strict timeframes.

Traboulsi: The Ministry of Education Must

Reverse the Decision MP Edgar Traboulsi, Rapporteur of the Education Committee, explained the facts of the situation to our website, *Diaspora Echo*. Amidst the ensuing chaos, he asked: Who bears the responsibility? Is it the physician candidates, or the Ministry—which has shown a complete lack of organization and failed to establish a schedule in advance for such exams? Traboulsi criticized the decision to catch students off guard without setting specific dates, especially given the approaching month of September—when they are due to return to their studies or work abroad. This move has caused confusion and frustration among those affected. He urged the Ministry—if it intends to reinstate the clinical exams—to postpone their implementation until next year, noting that the Orders of Physicians in Beirut and the North oppose the measure, and that the physicians and students have the right to object and file formal complaints.

He stated, "This is not the way to treat people, and it is evident that the Ministry of Education lacks a clear, defined agenda to guide its operations." Traboulsi called on the Minister of Education to reverse the decision and reconsider the matter in order to reach a solution satisfactory to all parties.
 

Judicial Review

In the absence of a formal decision, a number of physicians are preparing to seek judicial review before the State Council to challenge the procedures associated with the examination cycle. Based on the arguments being discussed by the objectors, the challenge is likely to focus on the decision-making process and the timing of the notification to candidates, as well as the harm caused by the indefinite suspension of results. However, the legal process itself faces a preliminary issue: what constitutes an actionable administrative decision when no clear official position has been issued? The physicians might argue that the failure to announce results—or the decision to condition them on an additional exam—constitutes an implicit administrative decision subject to review. Conversely, the administration might contend that the cycle is still ongoing and that no final decision affecting the candidates' rights has yet been issued.

This controversy is further complicated by continued official silence, which leaves doctors in a state of limbo while delaying the possibility of identifying a decision that could be legally challenged.
 

Between Regulation and Practice

The issue highlights a problem that extends beyond the current cycle, concerning the gap between outdated regulations and established administrative practice. If a specific examination is mandated by regulation but has not been administered for over six decades, does its mere existence in the text justify its immediate reintroduction? Or do principles of sound administration require prior notice, as well as a clear definition of its criteria, content, supervising bodies, and the mechanism for challenging its results? For their part, the doctors do not dispute the state's authority to update medical licensing standards.

However, they insist that any new development must apply to a subsequent cycle—following prior notification to candidates—rather than to individuals who have already completed the stages announced by the Ministry prior to the exam. The administration, meanwhile, appears to maintain that the cycle has not yet concluded; it argues that the failure to announce results implies the examination process remains ongoing, thereby allowing for the completion of its various components before the final outcome is issued. Amidst these conflicting positions, the most crucial document remains missing: a formal, written, and substantiated decision outlining the fate of the current cycle and the legal basis for adopting the clinical examination within it. Ultimately, what is required today is not merely a decision to hold or postpone the clinical examination, but the publication of the decision's underlying rationale and the acceptance of administrative responsibility.

As doctors prepare to turn to the State Council, 224 careers remain in limbo, awaiting an answer that has yet to be issued.

Aucun contenu en français pour cet article.